- Project Runeberg -  An American Dilemma : the Negro Problem and Modern Democracy /
580

(1944) [MARC] Author: Gunnar Myrdal
Table of Contents / Innehåll | << Previous | Next >>
  Project Runeberg | Catalog | Recent Changes | Donate | Comments? |   
Note: Gunnar Myrdal died in 1987, less than 70 years ago. Therefore, this work is protected by copyright, restricting your legal rights to reproduce it. However, you are welcome to view it on screen, as you do now. Read more about copyright.

Full resolution (TIFF) - On this page / på denna sida - VII. Social Inequality - 28. The Basis of Social Inequality - 4. The Jim Crow Laws

scanned image

<< prev. page << föreg. sida <<     >> nästa sida >> next page >>


Below is the raw OCR text from the above scanned image. Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan. Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!

This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.

580 An American Dilemma
tion to be inconsequential,^® are likely to underrate these eflFects. Southern
Negroes tell quite a different story. From their own experiences in dif-
ferent parts of the South they have told me how the Jim Crow statutes
were effective means of tightening and freezing—in many cases of insti-
gating—segregation and discrimination. They have given a picture of how
the Negroes were pushed out from voting and ofEceholding by means of
the disfranchisement legislation which swept like a tide over the Southern
states during the period from 1875 to 1910.“ In so far as it concerns the
decline in political, civic, and social status of the Negro people in the
Southern states, the Restoration of white supremacy in the late ^seventies

according to these informants—was not a final and consummated revo-
lution but the beginning of a protracted process which lasted until nearly
the First World War. During this process the white pressure continuously
increased^ and the Negroes were continuously pushed backward. Some older
white informants have related much the same story.
Before the Jim Crow legislation there is also said to have been a tendency
on the part of white people to treat Negroes somewhat differently depend-
ing upon their class and education. This tendency was broken by the laws
which applied to all Negroes. The legislation thus solidified the caste line
and minimized the importance of class differences in the Negro group.
This particular effect was probably the more crucial in the formation of the
present caste system, since class differentiation within the Negro group con-
tinued and, in fact, gained momentum.** As we shall find, a tendency is
discernible again, in recent decades, to apply the segregation rules with some
discretion to Negroes of different class status. If a similar trend was well
under way before the Jim Crow laws, those laws must have postponed this
particular social process for one or two generations.^
While the federal Civil Rights Bill of 1875 was declared unconstitu-
tional, the Reconstruction Amendments to the Constitution—which pro-
vided that the Negroes are to enjoy full citizenship in the United States,
that they are entitled to ‘‘equal benefit of all laws,” and that “no state shall

vSec Chapter 20.
Sec Chapter 32.

*


This problem of whether or not, and to what extent, the Jim Crow legislation
strengthened and instigated Southern segregation and discrimination patterns is worthy of
much more intensive study than has hitherto been given to it. The problem is important
by itself as concerning a rather unknown phase of American history. In addition, it has a
great theoretical interest. The common opinion among social scientists is that laws, particu-
larly in the social held, are almost insignificant : “stateways cannot change folkways.” This
opinion is prevalent among Southern authors but is found, in one form or another, in most
writings on the South and on the Negro problem even by Northern authors and by Negro
writers. I believe this view to be exaggerated and to be an expression of the general
American bias toward minimizing the effects of formal legislation, a bias in the laissez-faire
tradition. (See Chapter 1, Section ii^ and Appendix 2, Section 3.) The Jim Crow legisla-
tion represents an excellent test case for this a priori notion.

<< prev. page << föreg. sida <<     >> nästa sida >> next page >>


Project Runeberg, Sat Dec 9 01:31:31 2023 (aronsson) (download) << Previous Next >>
https://runeberg.org/adilemma/0642.html

Valid HTML 4.0! All our files are DRM-free